A Solution to the Paradox of Freedom from Motahhari's Perspective

There are two paradoxes with regard the nature of freedom and its relation with religiousness. First, freedom means no limitation. However, some believe that there is a limitation to freedom. The question is that if freedom is the basic principle then why there should be a limitation. In addition, if the limitation is prior, then, is there any room for freedom? Anyway, according to the mainstream thinking, the freedom is only restricted by the freedom of the others. Referring to the views of Ayatollah Motahhari, one can show that this theory is logically irrational. The only thing that has the capability to limit the freedom is the objective of freedom.The second paradox arises in the relation of freedom with religiousness. If there is no compulsion in religion, than how certain religious obligations such as jehad (holy war) and amre ba ma’ruf wa nahie az monkar (inviting people toward good deeds and preventing them from evil) are justifiable? If the religion were based on obligation, then how one would speak of freedom of the choice in religion? Martyred Ayatollah Motahhari has solved this dilemma by distinguishing between the freedom of thought and the freedom of belief. Some are of the opinion that this is not but an argumentation by what itself is the source of controversy. However, taking the intellectual foundations of his views, it seems that; first, the aforementioned distinction is rational. Secondly, it may solve the related paradox.